From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.1 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM, RP_MATCHES_RCVD,T_DKIM_INVALID shortcircuit=no autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF01E20286 for ; Wed, 13 Sep 2017 23:30:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751455AbdIMXaK (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Sep 2017 19:30:10 -0400 Received: from mail-it0-f51.google.com ([209.85.214.51]:46980 "EHLO mail-it0-f51.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751125AbdIMXaJ (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Sep 2017 19:30:09 -0400 Received: by mail-it0-f51.google.com with SMTP id 6so1017925itl.1 for ; Wed, 13 Sep 2017 16:30:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=DFKH57SajQttZ3rmxRPl6g1ieEoY+3fHhb3GJF7Z++s=; b=DhgKM/TLlHnyd+5HYDhgza6Q5SYpmMroikaG3zgoBD8E2gYbnQ7ydaotvFqtXDqXiA eD7eJFBA+GjHV+S15ug93ax3XMQDduBYwy5PCnt5pXu/e4NUIZIxdhkyZNV7+WLR+77P DleI/zDHOTmI4lAPZrdvYmgoS/EEjysqD0n5Vx7YoNX0DFO68qXQkP5Se+OCmnSsEsvo GaASGWt74b3kS9nV584/um8SPuIjnRCUyVovtSD5eI/ktkLFtSVwHvaBUnnUO/KAgC6E 0mcUDOddI2wU5jMTUbF26AcfAFcGRgz44a1lEo7Ci+949eGr98MN8g904HrgZd7edEUe cVWw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=DFKH57SajQttZ3rmxRPl6g1ieEoY+3fHhb3GJF7Z++s=; b=aR0rPJ3QEUOjDWOS3A/k6JUlqw8iw7+MNBWwOpJRmjMXSl6h/yTNIA9cwLXs2voWzO fb9aXb3C8QbHZbgLpncfFaa9uFYEA918E+60PWJTp7+/GiE9mWrucquOcTBUICO+bLnN RRfoQk7UCD08yhjpa5yuF6N7o8e3e7Dias9F2DwBrz6acBBCF1Qvy2HR1bbi8fk6DnyE cNjwhZPondzv87NebyONCjHJI+nLCnRG31IOK0LH9wVz3dLx4+5ORkTPtFQiyVYdw4nM ZEmvcIWLGOXzSiw5ihTkzWKq8O7LyxvRRoe5xHG1Ek6G5pLIeEjGTgBPzw1CtwRDTVSf d65A== X-Gm-Message-State: AHPjjUjXk11TK4DwMkhlW3HDoeuMyp18jfkFduZSXoTbEJmrhVmqbI3G /ve6vejdGYq5OEP0kr5rEMDMS76CXGQvw3pmSGQ= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AOwi7QCvw5aW9obJ9XS3/a2uWqtZ3EzdNphwRPBP1zWTBvWGow7AYRUHODtjhXe9KV8zOyo1cJwf3jVpBksnH76GiFA= X-Received: by 10.36.199.130 with SMTP id t124mr731668itg.2.1505345408386; Wed, 13 Sep 2017 16:30:08 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.107.164.103 with HTTP; Wed, 13 Sep 2017 16:30:07 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20170304011251.GA26789@aiede.mtv.corp.google.com> <20170307001709.GC26789@aiede.mtv.corp.google.com> <20170911185913.GA5869@google.com> From: Linus Torvalds Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2017 16:30:07 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: OID_YOGoLhUVs2-wxA83ZPeYj_M Message-ID: Subject: Re: RFC v3: Another proposed hash function transition plan To: demerphq Cc: Johannes Schindelin , Brandon Williams , Junio C Hamano , Jonathan Nieder , Git Mailing List , Stefan Beller , Jonathan Tan , Jeff King , David Lang , "brian m. carlson" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 6:43 AM, demerphq wrote: > > SHA3 however uses a completely different design where it mixes a 1088 > bit block into a 1600 bit state, for a leverage of 2:3, and the excess > is *preserved between each block*. Yes. And considering that the SHA1 attack was actually predicated on the fact that each block was independent (no extra state between), I do think SHA3 is a better model. So I'd rather see SHA3-256 than SHA256. Linus